Örebro-Stanford
Cross-Cultural Rhetoric
Marratech February 1 2010
Activity: Focus on the Rhetorical Situation of Political Cartoons; Texts in Conversation
I.
Welcome and introductory remarks
Time: 18.10-18.20 (Örebro) / 9.10-9.20 am (Stanford) 10 minutes
Location: Put http://switchboard.stanford.edu into marratech address bar; choose CCR Lounge.
Welcome and introductory remarks: Anders Eriksson, Dana Carluccio
Analyzing Obama in two cartoons (1 US, 1 Sweden): Political Cartoons as Rhetoric
II.
Small Group Discussion
Time: 18.20–19.00 / 9.20–10.00 40 minutes
Location: Using “switching instructions handout,” connect to small group room with your letter
(A-F). Click on World, type http://switchboard.stanford.edu in Marratech, choose room letter.
Introductions: Getting to Know Everyone in the Group
Activity: Get-to-know-you questions
o What is your name and email? Type answers on the whiteboard.
o Where did you grow up and what is the first very different place you
spent time in?
Small Group Rhetorical Analysis and Discussion
Activity: Each side, pick 1 political cartoon that represents your national values.
Each “side” should take 5 minutes and choose a cartoon – pick one with strong cultural
values that has rich potential for analysis. Once each “side” has picked a cartoon, rejoin
as a team and discuss the following questions together.
Tech Tip: link easily through CCR Workshop Page: http://ccr.stanford.edu/workshops/110308.html
Pick a cartoon from the selection that your team members brought in that you feel
demonstrates DOXA - cultural values.
Next Page: Questions 
Questions for analysis of the cartoons:
1. What is the purpose of the cartoon? Describe the argument of the cartoon. Does it
work primarily through logic (logos), character (ethos) or emotions (pathos)?
2.
Discuss the audience/audiences. Who do you think is addressed by the cartoon? Are
there any groups that you think will not understand it?
3. Describe the cultural context of the cartoon. Why might it work right now (kairos)?
How does the cultural context affect the appeals and arguments of the cartoon?
4. What specific rhetorical and/or visual elements suggest cultural values? How does the
cartoon reflect culture or contribute to shaping culture? Consider Doxa (or accepted
cultural values – or what we believe) and Nomos (or imposed cultural values – what
we are told). In what way does the cartoon reinforce or challenge cultural norms?
5. How would you reconsider the cartoon that you examined after hearing about the
cartoon that the other half of your team chose?
6. What do you learn about DIFFERENCES between the cultural values of the two
nations you looked at– how does visual rhetoric show this?
III. Collaborative Projects in Globally-Distributed Teams
Time: 19.00-19.15 / 10.00-10.15 15 minutes
Complete the following task as a team and post your writing/visuals on the whiteboard.
Save the whiteboard to present to the teams and post on the CCR blog.
Pick 1 person from each side to present your creation to the rest of the groups.
What are the most striking cultural differences in the cartoons? What are the cultural
presuppositions behind the creation of rhetorical messages?
As a team, write out your ideas for a political cartoon that might reflect these differences.
How can you show doxa? What do we learn about audiences across the globe? If you
want, you can draw a cartoon, or cut and paste images to make a cartoon. If you do so,
save you whiteboard by clicking “Export” then SAVE AS JPG.
IV. Report on Team Projects
Time: 19.15-19.30 / 10.15-10.30 15 minutes
Switch Marratech rooms back to CCR Lounge (http://switchboard.stanford.edu)
Pick 1 person from each side to present your product; everyone can comment in chat
Learn effective communication (writing, speaking, visual presentation, collaboration)
V. After the Video Conference: De-brief at Stanford and Örebro L 134
Time: Due before Wednesday!
Activity: Write a 100 word reflection as a comment on the Orebro-Stanford blog post
http://www.stanford.edu/group/ccr/blog/
What did you learn about rhetoric across cultures?
What was most memorable?
What new insights do you have?
What ideas do you wish you could continue to discuss?
What improvements to the video conference process can you suggest for next time?